Page 276 of 333 FirstFirst ... 176226266274275276277278286326 ... LastLast
Results 2,751 to 2,760 of 3322

Thread: Religion diminishes intellect[W:114,1607]

  1. #2751
    Sage


    RAMOSS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:18 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    15,722

    Re: Religion diminishes intellect[W:114,1607]

    Quote Originally Posted by blackjack50 View Post
    Speaking purely from a "scientific" mindset...I don't think you fully understand the experience people have. Something similar to having an encounter or feeling his presence, might be when you are feeling the passion from your favorite sports team winning a game and you being there in the moment. Or along those lines. It seems like you are ignoring how much of what is felt is also just normal human emotion and assigning that feeling to God...rather than random human emotion.

    The big question from 'people feel it'. to 'how do you know the feeling is the proper interpretation'?? THere is the feeling, and then there is showing that the feeling is more than just a phenomena due to the physiological state of the body , and the state of the brain. .... it is more than just hormones and neural connections??? That is the missing link.
    Knee-jerk anti-government sentiment is not a viable political philosophy.

  2. #2752
    Guru

    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 02:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    3,026

    Re: Religion diminishes intellect[W:114,1607]

    [QUOTE=blackjack50;1066994502]

    Originally Posted by Russell797 View Post

    1) No, discourage irrational thinking when approaching real world issues. Religion teaches irrationality is just fine.

    2) A belief in god is irrational and thus are religions which are based upon an irrationally imagined deity. Rather simple logic.

    3) So Creationists don't take a literal interpretation of genesis to be true? Why then do they deny biological evolution and a natural origin for life and the universe?

    4) To live by your religion is to live based on irrational thinking. No wonder the people of the world are so screwed up. They can't separate or recognize the real from the imagined.

    5) You have broken with your religion if that religion teaches something you do not believe in. If you accept biological evolution you deny the Biblical genesis story. You must treat that story as symbolic rather than literal as the Bible states. You must also reject ghosts, spirits, souls and the like if you are to be logically consistent with a natural origin. You can't have it both ways and be logically consistent. Choose a side. You said you accept biological evolution. Enough said. No strawman. You said it.

    6) Those people flew planes into the buildings for the religious reward, did they not?

    7) Yes, when attempting to address an issue logically and rationally you must remove personal bias, emotion and other contamination from the thought process. It's part of the scientific method. It's how to think objectively. If the issue does not call for that sort of intellectual rigor then it's not necessary. I don't do so when assessing a piece of art or loving music. I do need to think dispassionately when considering weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, or if someone is trying to sell me snake oil.

    8) Science a religion? No. Rational, evidence based thinking should be utilized where applicable. The issue though is that people repeatedly assume something to be true without evidence. People rationalize their way out of situations, assume they understand another person's motivations, misapply probabilities...vaccines, weather forecasts, fear of flying, fatalism, why me questions etc.



    1) Prove it? You are talking to a religious person who is both logical, believes in science, and quite rational. Religion does not discourage rationality. To say that, you need to prove that about ALL religions...as there are a plethora of different views on the topic.
    All religions which are based upon an irrational blind belief in a deity are themselves irrational. If the foundation crumbles so will the structure it supports. If you believe and follow your irrational religion then you are being irrational. If that doesn't carry over to the rest of your life then no problem.

    2) Mispoke. Please advise me on if this is actually a bad thing? Keep in mind that there is objective good to come out of religious beliefs for people as well (be it a strong moral code about doing good or charity and so on).
    Sure, lots of good comes out of religion. Not denying that at all. Like in nearly all things there are both good and bad. Positives and negatives.

  3. #2753
    Guru

    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 02:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    3,026

    Re: Religion diminishes intellect[W:114,1607]

    Continued:

    3) You said fundamentalist. A creationist is different. Let me explain: Biblical Literalism means you take the Bible literally, but you also factor in context. If someojevsaid there were "like a million people" there...would you take that literally? Or as an expression for a lot? An example would be the use of "40 days and nights." 40 days was a common number used in that era to just mean "a long time."

    A devout Catholic might be a fundamentalist, but not actually a creationist. Or believe 7 days has a much different meaning to God than to a human (time being relative of course). And this is what I mean in that I don't think you fully grasp that issue. I wouldn't expect many outside the church to do so though. Especially with how loud the media has been on the topic.
    If you are using that approach then there is no common ground for agreement. The meaning of the religious text is so malleable as to be meaningless. Make it say whatever you want. Interpretation without boundary.

    4) Irrarional thinking does not equal bad thinking. Further believing in a religion, which I'm not arguing about the rationality of, does not make one irrational. ALL humans act irrationally at times or hold irrational views. Said views do not make them bad, screwed up, or irrational.
    Irrational thinking is thinking without reason, without a logically consistent train of thought which starts with a premise and ends with a well supported conclusion. An open ended answer is irrational for the same reason the number value for Pi is irrational....it never reaches a definite end point or conclusion. Weapons of mass destruction in Iraq was an irrational conclusion...a guess based on inconclusive evidence. How many people bought into that one?

    5) Can you please reference the scripture verse where it says I must take the Bible literally...as is...word for word? Please refrain from trying to tell me what I "must" believe in order to be in my religion. This goes back to the obligatory atheist must create strawman of what defines MY religion and then...since I cannot be pigeon holed into that view...I am not a "true believer."

    Do you understand that that is not a logical or solid argument for you to make?
    You think you can pick and choose which tenets of your religion to accept and which not to? If you are a Catholic and you do that, then you are a modified Catholic or not really a Catholic at all. The religion you follow makes the rules. Not me. Not the Bible.

    6) So can I hold you responsible for the actions of any other atheist? Is that the precedent we are setting? Because that seems like what you want. Hardly a rational position.
    I don't hold you or other religious people responsible for terrorists flying planes into buildings. I blame it on irrational thinking. THEY did it for their religion. For the religious reward. THEY were not grounded in reality because of their irrational religious beliefs.

    7) Then I will reference you back to philosophy/religion/meaning of life. Can you please tell me at what point one is to determine the meaning of life or their purpose in said life..."dispassionately?" Do you see the issue? You can't go through life "dispassionately," which you understand logically, and expect the scientific method to answer all your questions.

    Like Doctor Jones said: Archeology is the search for fact, not truth. If it's truth you're interested in, Dr. Tyree's Philosophy class is right down the hall.
    If I ask a question which can be addressed rationally then that's the method I should choose. Questions which ask "Why" can not be answered scientifically, or rationally. Why presupposes a purpose. We don't know that there is any purpose. You can create your own purpose based upon your interests, humanity, your children etc. Believe in god if it helps.

    My issue and that of most scientists, is when the irrational "why" method is misused to address a "how" question. When you do that you end up with people thinking men walked along side dinosaurs or that they will get 72 virgins for flying a plane into the side of a building.

    8) I think you missed my point. My point is that "scientific thinking" is not the end all be all answer. There will not be a rational answer to every question. Period. And I understand that you get that. What I DON'T understand about your position is...do you think they religious people are attempting to answer ALL of life's questions with religion? Do you think the big question we are answering with "religion," is a question that can be reached "rationally?"
    Some answers can be addressed scientifically, some philosophically and some not at all. I am content with "I don't know". We can speculate, we can guess, we can believe but we will not KNOW unless we can rationally deduce a conclusion.

  4. #2754
    Sage


    RAMOSS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:18 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    15,722

    Re: Religion diminishes intellect[W:114,1607]

    Quote Originally Posted by Russell797 View Post

    All religions which are based upon an irrational blind belief in a deity are themselves irrational. If the foundation crumbles so will the structure it supports.
    Please demonstrate that these two statements are correct. Show, for example, the view of the deity of the humanistic judaism or the reconstructionst judaism fits into this category. If you can't.. then your statement, and all the conclusions based on it fail.
    Knee-jerk anti-government sentiment is not a viable political philosophy.

  5. #2755
    Guru

    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 02:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    3,026

    Re: Religion diminishes intellect[W:114,1607]

    Quote Originally Posted by RAMOSS View Post
    Please demonstrate that these two statements are correct. Show, for example, the view of the deity of the humanistic judaism or the reconstructionst judaism fits into this category. If you can't.. then your statement, and all the conclusions based on it fail.
    I am not the least bit familiar with those two religions. Is there a supernatural deity involved? If there is then the faith is an irrational one.

  6. #2756
    Sage


    RAMOSS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:18 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    15,722

    Re: Religion diminishes intellect[W:114,1607]

    Quote Originally Posted by Russell797 View Post
    I am not the least bit familiar with those two religions. Is there a supernatural deity involved? If there is then the faith is an irrational one.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanistic_Judaism

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reconstructionist_Judaism
    Knee-jerk anti-government sentiment is not a viable political philosophy.

  7. #2757
    Guru

    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 02:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    3,026

    Re: Religion diminishes intellect[W:114,1607]

    I see no mention of a supernatural god. Humanistic Judaism in particular seems to do away with god altogether while Reconstructionists redefine "god" as nature if I read it correctly. Both are cultural based organizations rather than theistic, deity worshipping ones so they don't apply to my premise. They don't go around positing ghosts and spirits as real aspects of reality. They are not thinking and acting irrationally, rather they recognize the discord that traditional theistic religions pose with common sense reality and have address it....that's why they exist at all and why they broke with traditional Judaism. They seem to be on my side of the argument.

  8. #2758
    Sage


    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    SW Virginia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    17,176

    Re: Religion diminishes intellect[W:114,1607]

    Quote Originally Posted by nota bene View Post
    I don't understand why you would enjoy embarrassing anybody about anything--what is in it for you? Why would this bring you pleasure? Does this enhance a shaky self-esteem?
    One thing is certain: If religion diminishes intellect, Realitywins surely can't afford religion.

  9. #2759
    Sage
    chromium's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    A2
    Last Seen
    06-05-17 @ 09:53 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    16,969

    Re: Religion diminishes intellect[W:114,1607]

    Quote Originally Posted by blackjack50 View Post
    8) I think you missed my point. My point is that "scientific thinking" is not the end all be all answer. There will not be a rational answer to every question. Period. And I understand that you get that. What I DON'T understand about your position is...do you think they religious people are attempting to answer ALL of life's questions with religion? Do you think the big question we are answering with "religion," is a question that can be reached "rationally?"
    The goal of science is to lead us to rational answers. The goal of religious texts? Well, the judeo-christian bible ceased adding chapters back around 300 AD. In that stretch of 400BC-300AD, there was very little scientific development compared to now, including darwinism. Maybe by chinese astronomers. So if you believe evolution...it's not thanks to religion. At best, it operates separately from science, if not always diametrically opposed

    I think your case could be presented differently by instead looking at how the God you believe in can be responsible for all the phenomena we know of or that might exist - alternate universe, such a vast amount of space but so rare is life, why intelligent life came about only after billions of years and mass extinctions, what is the purpose of life and afterlife? Because these are the questions atheists consider about this subject. It's not JUST about judeo-christianity and it's not just about looking for inconsistencies or ulterior motives in your favorite holy book
    Quote Originally Posted by Gathomas88 View Post
    Slavery also doesn't necessarily have to be terrible.

  10. #2760
    Sage
    blackjack50's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 03:18 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    23,176

    Re: Religion diminishes intellect[W:114,1607]

    Quote Originally Posted by chromium View Post
    The goal of science is to lead us to rational answers. The goal of religious texts? Well, the judeo-christian bible ceased adding chapters back around 300 AD. In that stretch of 400BC-300AD, there was very little scientific development compared to now, including darwinism. Maybe by chinese astronomers. So if you believe evolution...it's not thanks to religion. At best, it operates separately from science, if not always diametrically opposed
    A couple of points (broken down to make it easier to respond).

    1) The goal depends on the religion. The person. The denomination. But books have been added to Christianity. Books of order. Hymns. Creeds. It all depends on your denomination. This all matters in how the church will exist in the modern world. And how it will discuss said goals.

    2) Separation does not equal opposition. I mean you see that clearly. But I wouldn't say it opposes it mostly either.

    the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment.
    I would say that religion is far more complex in definition. But it could be boiled down to philosophy, culture, morals, ethics, and not just what "is," but what should be. About you. Science is academic. Religion is not.

    3) Science is about rationality. Religion is not. That does not make them opponents. And I think some people on both sides refuse to accept that.

    I think your case could be presented differently by instead looking at how the God you believe in can be responsible for all the phenomena we know of or that might exist - alternate universe, such a vast amount of space but so rare is life, why intelligent life came about only after billions of years and mass extinctions, what is the purpose of life and afterlife? Because these are the questions atheists consider about this subject. It's not JUST about judeo-christianity and it's not just about looking for inconsistencies or ulterior motives in your favorite holy book
    I think that the purpose of religion is best left to the individual in why it has purpose in their life. Me? I don't need an explanation of the afterlife. I just want to know that I can be forgiven for the wrong I've done. That I am supposed to love others and that that is right. That my loved ones have meaning. And that they aren't just gone. Purpose. Order. That there is something else.

    A cog in a clock need not understand time. Only that he matters in telling it.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    The Crowd is not the sum of its parts.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •